14 C.F.R. § 91.7
Civil aircraft airworthiness
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: Prichard Enter., Inc. v. Adkins, 858 F. Supp. 2d 576 (E.D.N.C. 2012).
Prichard Enter., Inc. v. Adkins, 858 F. Supp. 2d 576 (E.D.N.C. 2012). “92-93; see 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 . Prichard planned to hangar the plane in Little Rock, where Sorrells lived.”
Van v. Portneuf Med. Ctr., 212 P.3d 982 (Idaho 2009). “14 C.F.R. § 91.7 . 9 . In its brief before this Court, PMC states: "The only real safety issues involved Van’s allegation that [a pilot] took off with ice on the rotor blades .”
Aldana v. Air East Airways, Inc., 477 F. Supp. 2d 489 (D. Conn. 2007). “13(a) and 14 CFR 91.7(a); b. Allowed said aircraft to be operated even though it was not in an airworthy condition in violation of 14 CFR 91.”
Turner v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 608 F.3d 12 (D.C. Cir. 2010). “Background The FAA suspended the pilots’ certificates because it concluded they had, among other things, operated an aircraft that was “unairworthy,” in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a). Each pilot appealed his suspension, and both cases were assigned to the same ALJ, who…”
James C. Robinson v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 28 F.3d 210 (D.C. Cir. 1994). “The Order recited that Robinson had violated four Federal Aviation Regulations — 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7 (a) & (b), 91.9(a), and 91.”
Abdullah v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 181 F.3d 363 (3rd Cir. 1999). “103 (1996), verify the aircraft’s worthiness, 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (1996), and ensure that passengers are briefed on the use of their seatbelts, 14 C.”
Keyser v. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins., 617 F. Supp. 1406 (N.D. Ill. 1985). “It is relevant that 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 employs the term "required flight crewmember" in mandating such personnel remain at assigned stations "unless his absence is necessary in the performance of his duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft or in connection with his…”
Lackey v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 386 F. App'x 689 (9th Cir. 2010). “The ALJ found that Lackey violated 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7 , 91.9, 91.9(b)(1), and 91.”
McMahan Jets, LLC v. Roadlink Transp., Inc., 68 F. Supp. 3d 817 (W.D. Tenn. 2014). “2010) (noting that the term is “well understood by those in the aircraft industry”); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (prohibiting operation of a civil aircraft “unless it is in an airworthy condition,” without defining the term).”
Anders v. United States, 307 F. Supp. 3d 1298 (M.D. Fla. 2018). “It appears that Anders was unaware of the weather along his planned route up the Florida peninsula flying VFR. The National Weather Service had issued an advisory (AIRMET) putting airmen on notice that ceilings were below 1000 feet and visibility was less than three statute…”
Presidential Aviation, Inc. v. Fed. Aviation Admin. (11th Cir. 2021). “65 (b), and operated an unairworthy aircraft on each of the four October 21, 2014 flights, in violation of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7 (a) and 135.25(a)(2). The FAA proposed a civil penalty of $38,825 for the five alleged regulatory violations.”
Dietz, J. v. Avco Corp. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2022). “____________________________________________ 16 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 , “Civil Aircraft Airworthiness,” provides, in relevant part, that “[n]o person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.”
— 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) — 1 case
Aldana v. Air East Airways, Inc., 477 F. Supp. 2d 489 (D. Conn. 2007). “13(a) and 14 CFR 91.7(a); b. Allowed said aircraft to be operated even though it was not in an airworthy condition in violation of 14 CFR 91.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.